Cost-effectiveness of ranibizumab and bevacizumab for age-related macular degeneration: 2-year findings from the IVAN randomised trial

BMJ Open. 2014 Jul 29;4(7):e005094. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005094.

Abstract

Objective: To assess the incremental cost and cost-effectiveness of continuous and discontinuous regimens of bevacizumab (Avastin) and ranibizumab (Lucentis) for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective.

Design: A within-trial cost-utility analysis with a 2-year time horizon, based on a multicentre factorial, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial.

Setting: 23 hospital ophthalmology clinics.

Participants: 610 patients aged ≥50 years with untreated nAMD in the study eye.

Interventions: 0.5 mg ranibizumab or 1.25 mg bevacizumab given continuously (monthly) or discontinuously (as-needed) for 2 years.

Main outcome measures: Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

Results: Total 2-year costs ranged from £3002/patient ($4700; 95% CI £2601 to £3403) for discontinuous bevacizumab to £18 590/patient ($29 106; 95% CI £18 258 to £18 922) for continuous ranibizumab. Ranibizumab was significantly more costly than bevacizumab for both continuous (+£14 989/patient ($23 468); 95% CI £14 522 to £15 456; p<0.001) and discontinuous treatment (+£8498 ($13 305); 95% CI £7700 to £9295; p<0.001), with negligible difference in QALYs. Continuous ranibizumab would only be cost-effective compared with continuous bevacizumab if the NHS were willing to pay £3.5 million ($5.5 million) per additional QALY gained. Patients receiving continuous bevacizumab accrued higher total costs (+£599 ($938); 95% CI £91 to £1107; p=0.021) than those receiving discontinuous bevacizumab, but also accrued non-significantly more QALYs (+0.020; 95% CI -0.032 to 0.071; p=0.452). Continuous bevacizumab therefore cost £30 220 ($47 316) per QALY gained versus discontinuous bevacizumab. However, bootstrapping demonstrated that if the NHS is willing to pay £20 000/QALY gained, there is a 37% chance that continuous bevacizumab is cost-effective versus discontinuous bevacizumab.

Conclusions: Ranibizumab is not cost-effective compared with bevacizumab, being substantially more costly and producing little or no QALY gain. Discontinuous bevacizumab is likely to be the most cost-effective of the four treatment strategies evaluated in this UK trial, although there is a 37% chance that continuous bevacizumab is cost-effective.

Trial registration number: ISRCTN92166560.

Keywords: Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD); cost-effectiveness; cost-minimisation analysis; cost-utility analysis; trial-based economic evaluation; vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors.

Publication types

  • Multicenter Study
  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Angiogenesis Inhibitors / economics*
  • Angiogenesis Inhibitors / therapeutic use
  • Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized / economics*
  • Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized / therapeutic use
  • Bevacizumab
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • Drug Costs / statistics & numerical data
  • Female
  • Health Care Costs / statistics & numerical data*
  • Humans
  • Macular Degeneration / drug therapy*
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  • Ranibizumab
  • Regression Analysis
  • United Kingdom
  • Visual Acuity

Substances

  • Angiogenesis Inhibitors
  • Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized
  • Bevacizumab
  • Ranibizumab